Pay, Military and Civilian

Sirs:

The Senate of the U. S. on Dec. 16, 1929 passed a bill authorizing the Federal Radio Commission "to appoint a Chief Engineer, who shall receive a salary of $10,000 per annum, and not to exceed two assistants to such Chief Engineer at salaries not to exceed $7,500 per annum. . . .' The engineering work of the Federal Radio Commission has been performed heretofore by Capt. Hill, U. S. A., and, before him, by Commander Craven, U. S. N.

It is interesting to note this contrast: the pay of a captain in the Army is less than $3,000 per year; that of a commander in the navy less than $5,000. The pay authorized for a civilian trio to perform work heretofore handled by these officers, one at a time, totals $25,000.

Reason: The pay of the military services is based on the living standards of the year 1908 whose dollar would buy two of 1930's.

There is agitation for reasonable compensation for the military services. Will TIME stand behind it?

JOHN W. MURPHY JR. Lieutenant, U. S. N. Pearl Harbor, Hawaii

TIME does not crusade. But TIME will freely report the pay agitations of the military.--ED.

Piratical Seattle?

Sirs:

In a footnote of the Aeronautics section of TIME for Dec. 23 there was given a list of the dirigible mooring masts in the U. S. Included in that list was one located at Seattle, Washington. To the best of my knowledge there is no mast at Seattle but there is one located on the prairie just five miles SOUTH of Tacoma. (Seattle is over 35 miles NORTH of Tacoma.)

It has long been a recognized fact that anything of importance that is or happens in this state usually reaches the East Coast tagged by Seattle as belonging to them or as a part of Seattle. Nearly every section of the State has suffered from this "publicity piracy."

Hereafter I think it would be advisable to verify very carefully any news or event happening in the State of Washington that reaches you under the date line of "Seattle."

LYLE LEMLEY Tacoma, Washington

TIME also reported Seattle as the western objective of the Army's "frigid test" flight (TIME, Jan. 6). The objective was Spokane. Cause for such errors seems to be Seattle's news-vigor, reporting the Northwest more actively than other northwestern cities. Let news-vigor increase elsewhere. Meanwhile, TIME will redouble its efforts for Northwest accuracy.--ED.

Iowa's Patents

Sirs:

On p. 15 of your issue of Jan. 20 under the title "Husbandry," there is the statement, "Dr. Sweeney produced and the state of Iowa patented a cornstalk wallboard. . . ."

Inasmuch as the patent laws provide that only the first, original and sole (or joint) inventor (s) can "patent" a new and useful art, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, it is not entirely clear how Iowa patented this process.

Perhaps TIME can explain this anomaly!

WILLIAM CYRUS RICE Grand Rapids, Mich.

Dr. Orland Russell Sweeney developed wallboard-from-cornstalks at Iowa's tax-supported State College. State money went to erect a $150,000 testing plant. The patents, when issued to Dr. Sweeney, thus belonged to Iowa, whose agent Dr. Sweeney was in obtaining them.--ED.

Corn

Sirs:

"Corn on the Mind"

The transition from Prohibition and corn sugar (p. 14) to Husbandry and cornstalks (p. 15) in TIME, Jan. 20, might well be expected to leave TIME'S writer still under the lingering effects, real or imaginary, of an unduly prolonged interest in corn and corn formulas. Else why the caption of the first paragraph under Husbandry: "Corn from Cornstalks?" Either TIME is guilty or I myself need some additional illumination (perhaps some good corn would help) to enable me to perceive how it is proposed to get the "corn" from the cornstalk.

CHARLES W. GERARD Kansas City, Mo.

To blame: a proofreader. The headline should have read: "Coin from Corn-stalks."--ED.

Williamsburg Woman

Sirs:

My attention has recently been called to a footnote on p. 27 of the Dec. 9 issue of TIME mentioning "an old woman of Williamsburg, Va., who owns and occupies a ramshackle two-room house built in George Washington's time, long used as the Town Clerk's Office." Your note seeks to draw a comparison between the "two-room woman" and M. Clemenceau's Vendee landlady. . . .

"The ramshackle two-room house" in Williamsburg should be multiplied by seven to its actual number of 14 rooms, of which seven are in the brick portion of the Colonial era and the remainder are in an addition of later days. The brick portion was the office of the Secretary of the Colony, and later of the Clerk of the Court of Chancery. Also incorrect is your statement that the "two-room woman has refused $45,000 for her property."

The bad taste of the footnote I will not particularly comment upon, as it should perhaps be blamed less on you than on some informant. My sister and I own the property, which we cherish, not only for its history but also for its tender associations as the home of our parents-- the home in which they and our sisters died, within the three acre grounds of which they lie in their resting-places beneath a grove of trees. So that the home, the grounds, the family burying-ground, the trees, the shrubs, the flowers are enshrined in our hearts. We were reared on his spot, and we have reached ages which cause 'ou to mention "Old Women." "The ramshackle two-room house" is home to us, and its grounds he last resting-place of our beloved dead. 'We have not sought to measure these tender associations in money. . . .

The effort to buy was initiated by an insistent /isit of the buyer's agent at seven o'clock in the morning, which occasioned ourselves and our guests going breakfastless until ten o'clock, while we were told that we must sell, that the graves of our dead were neglected, and many other things of a most unkind nature, which drew apologies, and then repetitions.

I doubt that you will be willing to publish :his, though my permission is freely given, and in fact I request that you do so.

VIRGINIA W. JONES Williamsburg, Va.

For any pain TIME'S report may have caused Miss Jones, TIME is genuinely sorry. But from her letter it is quite apparent that she is not the Williamsburg householder of whom TIME was informed, of whom it told. Nor did TIME mention Miss Jones's name. Confusion still seems to exist over what oldtime Williamsburg houses were used as the town clerk's office, but an official recheck confirms TIME'S report that a $45,000 offer from John D. Rockefeller Jr., who is restoring Williamsburg to its colonial aspect, was refused by the aged female owner of a ramshackle two-room house.--ED.

Busby-Bearskin

Sirs:

. . . Some weeks ago, TIME spoke of the Prince of Wales wearing a "Busby," as part of his uniform as Colonel of the Welsh Guards. Is not a bearskin, which is part of his uniform, quite different from a "Busby"?

ARTHUR HALE

In British army circles the fur headgear worn by Edward of Wales as Colonel of the Welsh Guards is known as a busby. Bearskin is a permissible but not popular term for the same article. Other regiments that sport a busby (or bearskin) are those of all the Footguards, Fusiliers, Hussars and Royal Horse Artillery. As the Prince of Wales is also Colonel-in-Chief of the Royal Scots Fusiliers he is entitled to two busbies, each with different insignia.--ED.

Stunting Field

Sirs:

Glancing over your article on "Canada's Air Dominion" (TIME, Jan. 27) I notice that you comment that the "Royal Flying Corps had some military schools around Lake Ontario" but that many Canadian airmen train at Kelly Field.

If it were necessary to send Canadians to Kelly Field for training I wonder why it was necessary to bring hundreds of American flyers to Leaside and Armour Heights (just outside Toronto) when the U. S. entered the War? The reason the flyers themselves gave was that there was no flying field of equal facilities in the U. S. Such flyers commonly spent two weeks training on the Canadian fields before they went to France. Armour Heights was, I believe, rated as the finest stunt flying field on this continent for at least a couple of years. Certainly I have never seen more breath-taking stunts since than were done by the men who flew those machines which now seem so clumsy. Greater variety in stunting is of course now possible, due to better construction of the planes.

A third flying field was at Beamsville, just outside Hamilton. Where does TIME think Canadian aviators trained during the three years before April, 1917?

CLARE SHIPMAN St. Paul, Minn.

Macfadden Advts.

Sirs:

"A man is judged by the company he keeps." While this may be fallacious reasoning, it is, nevertheless, the opinion of many. Is it not possible, then, that many readers come to judge a periodical by the advertising it carries?

. . . The advertisement on p. 35 (TIME, Jan. 27) seems decidedly out of keeping with TIME.

The appearance of this advertisement coupled with the recent news space you have given to the Great Body Lover [Bernarr Macfadden] may cause some wonder if TIME is not another of Kis journalistic ventures. . . .

FRANK L. RAND Chicago, Ill.

Sirs: Perhaps I am dumb, and perhaps business-is-business, but never in my life have I seen a weirder combination than your history of Ber- narr Macfadden in the same issue with one of his advertisements. You could not have wanted that account very badly. As a respecter of TIME'S subtleties, I could only suppose you meant the history as an apology for the ad. But if that was the case, why accept the ad in the first place? It couldn't do Macfadden much good either, I should think, to advertise in a magazine which has so consistently exposed his products and his methods.

PETER P. BEECH Boston, Mass.

Rigid is the separation between TIME'S advertising columns and its editorial text. Publisher Macfadden advertises in TIME, not to attract readers for his magazines but to tell business executives the com- mercial possibilities of the mass market he has developed. TIME text will continue to report Macfadden activities objectively, factually, whenever they are newsworthy. --ED.

Ten Best Films

Sirs:

I am a reader of TIME who thinks that its critic of films is the best to be found anywhere.

I am looking forward to reading your selection of the ten best films of the year. Am I to be disappointed? . . .

BILLY KEMP Wichita Falls, Tex.

The ten outstanding films of 1929 as observed by TIME :

THE PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC (French) --with Falconetti.

FACES OF CHILDREN--directed by Jacques Feyder.

THE LASH OF THE CZAR (Amkino)-- with Shverubovitch.

DISRAELI (Warner)--with George Arliss.

THE LETTER (Paramount) -- with Jeanne Eagels.

WELCOME DANGER (Paramount)--with Harold Lloyd.

TAMING OF THE SHREW (United Art-ists)--with Mary Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks.

HALLELUJAH (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer) --with Nina Mae McKinney.

THE DIVINE LADY (First National)-- with Corinne Griffith.

THE COCKEYED WORLD (Fox)--with Lily Damita.--ED.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.